1:18 "even with the conveyor belt matching the plane's take-off speed". The plane was going faster than the conveyor belt. Either that or the wheels weren't touching the conveyor belt.
@ogiugi96 Of course it is. That is why airplanes have wheels and they don't just grind down the runway on there belly. The more friction, the more force that is needed to get to takeoff speed.
if there are people out there who believed that a plane could not take off on a conveyor belt, is a perfect & true example of low intelligence STUPID. ( and should have their face photos in the Wikipedia page for the term Stupid. ) even before Mythbusters PROVED it it dont take much brain power to understand basic physics of how an aircraft flies.
I have lost all respect for mythbusters, not that I had much to begin with. Why bother doing sloppy experiments when you can just prove this stuff with good old fashion pencil and paper.
@Stroggoni Ever heard of science experiments? Some times pencil and paper can be deceiving when dealing with real world variables, also, if people still don't believe an airplane can take off on a conveyor belt after seeing a video of it, you think they would believe it if they only saw it on paper?
What's with all the ignorant comments? Did you guys not even watch the video? The propeller pushes against the air to propel the plane forward. The only purpose of the wheels is to support the plane. The movement of the conveyor has a negligible effect on the air speed at the level of the propeller.
it is fucking easy to understand: if the propeller is making the air move past the wings fast enough it will take off (lets put it this way: in a wind tunnel, with the flaps up it would take off)
its not its forward momentum which pulls it up, but the wind's speed, therefore a little plane with a powerful propeller will take off.
@Belmott13 That's not how it works. A plane needs airspeed to create lift across the wings. The propeller, no matter how big, will not provide lift across the wings.. Newtons 3rd Law. There is no opposing force because the force is attached to the plane. It's the same as standing on the deck of a yacht, holding a fan to blow wind into the sails.
As for the pilot in this video. If he doesn't understand the aerodynamics he shouldn't be flying.
Any airspeed over 25 mph over the wings will produce lift. The truck and conveyer belt is obviously moving at half the speed of the aircraft. What would have been much better is if the aircraft had been anchored to the ground and held stationary while the conveyer belt was pulled beneath it. It would have produced accurate results and the plane would not have taken off.
@SuperAieee your an idiot and not getting the point. Nobody ever said the wings don't need air moving across them for flight. What people have a hard time understanding is that thrust does not act on the ground, it acts on the air. So it doesnt matter what the wheels are doing of how fast they are spinning, the propeller is pulling the plane forward. Once it starts moving forward you get lift. Your hung up on the ground, because your brain doesn't function like someone with common sense.
@superskullmaster Actually, you just got trolled. Lets reread SuperAieee's post. "What would have been much better is if the aircraft had been anchored to the ground...and the plane would not have taken off." Pretty sure that is self-explanatory and true even without a conveyor. Trolololol.
@SuperAieee It's sort of a trick question because the real core question of it is: WILL THE PLANE MOVE FORWARD OR NOT? Most people intuition says NO because we are used to transportation like walking and cars which "push" from ground to move forward. But a plane WILL move forward because it "pulls" the AIR to move forward and the conveyer belt beneath it can move backwards as fast as it likes but it only makes the wheels spin faster and doesn't affect the forward movement of the plane.
Holy fuck...This is just a horribly conducted experiment. The plane is clearly not stationary, it's moving forward, which means the speed of the plane is not the same as that of the conveyor belt.
If they'd done it correctly, the plane would not be moving forward and would NOT take off.
@Mtc529 YOUR WRONG!!! the airplane is using the prop to propel itself not the wheels. the wheels are merely a bearing to smooth the movement of the plane while its on the ground. That plane is an ultralight. You don't need anything but a drivers licence to fly one of those. Which means the pilot probably doesn't quite understand the physics of flight. He didn't have to pass any written test or ever solo or anything.
@nge1301 the planes power is in relation to the air around it and not the wheels on the ground. the fact that there was something being pulled from under it means nothing because all it did was make the wheels spin faster. if you pulled the air around the plane then it wouldnt move but pulling the ground from underneath it wont do anything
look the myth is that you could get a plane to stay stationary on a treadmill...but this would in fact be impossble because the propellor will still pull it forward regardless of the speed of the treadmill...the plane will go just as fast as it did before on solid ground
wtf this wasnt the myth the plane was moving forward enough to lift up it was suppose to stay in between like two cones for the myth and the tarp move under it
Oh, and it also proved that the plane still had plenty of friction with the ground, due to the fact that their conveyor belt is nothing more than some flimsy ribbon.
This is a prime example of the fact that any average joe with the money can become a pilot, But understanding aerodynamics can make you a safer more proficient pilot.
Its bullshit... If V of car (belt) = V of plane, plane would stay without moving relative to enviroment.... It means only wheels would be spinned, but plane would be without move, cause plane niid buoyancy to wings, not spinning wheels...
@ghostofandy yes, it would still move forward no matter how fast the belt is moving, because the conveyor produces no backwards force on the plane due to the wheels being able to spin freely and cancel out the belt's motion.
@ghostofandy yes, though if the conveyor got fast enough then i think the wheels wouldnt be able to turn fast enough and the plane might go backwards, but realistically the conveyer doesnt count for shit no matter how fast its going
@ghostofandy yes, it's not like a car, which what moves it is the wheel, but the plane what moves it the propeller, if the propeller blows air from the front to the rear, it mooves forward ;]
@ghostofandy The plane uses the air to move forward, *not* the ground. So the plane would still move forward even if the "treadmill" was going backwards at 10x the speed of the plane. The wheels would be rolling like crazy though (11x the speed of the plane).
wtf, who honestly believed this myth? they said it was controversial on their website. Do they not explain how planes work in America, pro tip, they need to be moving.
@postmanpat261 It IS moving! the plane rushed past the traffic cones. It is moving relative to the air which is why it takes off. The propeller is pulling the plane through the air, which is what gives it it's speed. The wheels go faster because of the backwards moving ground but the propeller pulls it through the air.
this test and these arguments are a host of stupidity and ignorance. Pick up a book with lesson 1 in aerodynamics, read about the 4 forces; your answer is there
To dial back the anger a bit, and just try to help explain, picture the landspeeder from star wars driving over a conveyer belt. The belt would not change anything. Now replace the fantasy hover tech with some free spinning wheels that do basically the same thing- keep it off the ground and little else- and there you have it.
I think the point here is that it's not the wheels that are giving the plane its speed-- it's the propeller that's giving it its speed. Therefore, the conveyor belt doesn't drag the plane backwards or rob it of forward velocity-- the wheels just spin ineffectively while the propeller does all the pulling until the plane is going fast enough to gain lift.
If it were the wheels that "pushed" the plane, the result would have been different.
@minetruly Thats te situation here, the plane DID go forward look the movie again. A plane can only fly when it has enough wind under the wings... and for that he needs forward motion.
You dont need to test this.. just think about it... the plane isnt like a car, it doesnt go forward from the wheels, a fan pushes it forward. no matter how fast the conveyor goes in the opposite direction, the fan pushes on the air. The only difference between a normal takeoff is that the wheels are moving faster to keep up with the speed of the fan AND the movement of the conveyor.
@SuperShadow Really small planes like the one in the video take off at 40-60 mph. I don't know exactly what plane was being used, but the Cessna, a pretty small but still much larger plane than this one has a Vx speed of 60 mph. Meaning that not only will the plane easily takeoff, but it infact achieves the greatest ratio of altitude climb:distance.
@SuperShadow What difference does it make how fast the belt's going? No matter how fast the belt's moving, the wheels will match that speed and just cancel out the movement of the belt.
The only way the conveyor belt would effect the plane at all is if the conveyor belt was going in the same way as the plane aiding it's acceleration, and even then it wouldn't help by much.
What? He was expecting to just sit there knowing that the propeller provides the thrust not the wheels? The wheels are only for landing and take off, nothing more!
Now if you tried this with a car then it would most likely just sit there.
It's like pulling the tablecloth from under the tableware... that and putting propellers on the tableware.
The wheels spin freely because and the plane will lift because the conveyer has minimal to no effect on the planes forward momentum, which is generated by the propeller, not the wheels, they spin freely, no gears, no brakes applied.
No power is generated trough the wheels. They are there to reduce the friction, thus the opposite going ground will just make the wheels spin faster.
These two dips will never recreate something exactly. This isn't a giant conveyor belt already moving, It's a tarp on the ground being pulled by a truck.
This isn't science, It's doing the first thing you think of.
The flaw is not in the experiment, but in the question being asked. People are curious as to whether a stationary plane can achieve enough lift to overcome gravity. This CANNOT BE ACHIEVED THROUGH A CONVEYOR BELT. One would need to construct some means of keeping the plane from moving laterally, but still able to retain it's ability to move vertically.
@kayakincheese The only reason we can move through the air is because winds hardly ever get this high (65knts is fast for a natural wind). Even so, we feel the effects of the wind. Your ground speed slows in relation to any headwind component you experience. If you were to have a full value headwind that matched your airspeed, you'd be flying yet not moving in relation to the ground. It's pretty simple when you remember that flight has nothing to do with the ground or what it's doing.
@kayakincheese No, the engine's thrust is relative to the air as well, so if you faced the plane in a 65 knt headwind, you'd need the engine on and providing enough thrust to keep from being blown backwards. In these conditions, you could pull back on the yolk and you'd jump off the ground and would be flying (engine going and everything) with no relative motion to the ground.
If the myth were "Confirmed" then the world could do without runways which what the real myth is about. What they have done is fly a plane off a giant conveyor belt (the Earth).
@detectiveinspekta No, the conveyor belt did not help, nor hinder the performance of the plane, it had no effect. The myth is interesting because so many people thought the plane would be held still by the belt like a car or human would. Planes propel themselves differently than cars or humans, this is why they do not act the same on a conveyor belt.
This is my take on it. Not seen the whole vid but the myth is about if a plane will take off when the plane and convener belt speed is matched. In this case the plane is stationary relative to the outside ground. Therefore will not take off, no air movement. I don't really care on how the plane goes forward (propeller, jet engine, rockets), all that matters is that it maintains the same speed as the belt. But since everyone is saying the plane wheels spin faster then "Myth confused".
@detectiveinspekta But, what if a conveyor belt can not hold an airplane stationary like it would a car or human, due to the different way they propel themselves? You made an assumption that the plane would be held stationary, that assumption was wrong.
depends whether the power is going to the wheels or the props, if it is applying the force through the air, the wheels don't matter, the plane will accelerate. if the force is applied on the tarp, it won't get any speed, therefore no air will pass the wings, and there will be no lift
@DragonoftheEastblu What is a "real conveyor belt"? do they have to get an official one from Conveyor Belts Inc? A conveyor belt is a piece of moving ground. That was a real conveyor belt. You should think a bit harder on why an airplane CAN NEVER BE HELD STATIONARY ON A CONVEYOR BELT like a car or human would. Airplanes do not push off the ground to move like a human. Airplanes do not act the same way on a conveyor belt as a human.
@mitchio83 u do realize that u sound like a total fag right?. anyways conveyor belts are usually made of a strong fiber belt and wrapped around a tank track like system. perhaps you've seen one at ur local grocery store. this "conveyor belt" was nothing more than some tarp attached to a pick up. the tarp is causing too much traction to really match the speed. it should not make contact with the ground. plus this bush plane uses forward pull instead of rear thrust or the lift of a rotorcraft
LET ME DUMB IT DOWN FOR SOME OF YALL OUT THERE...if the plane is matching the speed of the conveyor belt and then begins to throttle it will move forward because it is NOT pushing off the ground for thrust...the wheels on the plane would be spinning faster than usual but what pulls the plane forward it the propeller
@kermit368 but doesn't the myth state that the speed of the wheels and the speed of the belt have to match? This would obviously be difficult/impossible to achieve because you'd need a huge force on the belt to match the thrust of the plane, and both thrust and wheel/belt speed would probably go to infinity.
I recognise the thrust is against the air not the ground but can maybe countered by a force from the ground as long as there is some resistance in the wheel bearings or something?
I love how pretentious some comments are despite the fact that some of you have no idea what you're talking about. The fact that the propeller is not connected to the wheels is completely irrelevant. Until that plane reaches takeoff speed and lifts off, the weight is supported by the landing gear. All this episode proved is that the engine was powerful enough to overcome the effect of the conveyor belt and move the plane forward. A car could do that too. Even Jamie stated this exp was BS.
@Tw0DrinkMike you dont seem to understand that it doesnt matter how much the plane weighs on the conveyor or how fast the treadmill is going...if the propeller spins the plane goes forward it doesnt have to overcome the conveyor
@kermit368 I understand. The weight is supported by the landing gear. The landing gear is in contact with the conveyor. Until the plane becomes airborne, the wheels push off the ground beneath them. It does not matter what the source of thrust is. It does not matter whether the engine causes the wheels to rotate directly or indirectly. A propeller does not impart magical hovering abilities onto the aircraft. It is still sitting and has to overcome the effect of the ground beneath it.
@Tw0DrinkMike and i understand what your saying...but it does matter where the source of thrust is...the conveyor could be going a 100 mph...when that propellor comes on that plane moves forward...the speed does not effect its weight...and it doesnt have to overcome the force put on by the conveyor
@Tw0DrinkMike think of it this way, if you put a plane on a giant treadmill when it was off it would move back...but if you turned it on, some say it would stay in place but it would begin to move forward without a problem because it isnt having to fight against any greater force than it was so its thrust is not connected to the wheels and in fact is very relavent
@Tw0DrinkMike The conveyor belt does not affect the plane whatsoever because the wheels are free spinning. It would accelerate at the same rate with or without the conveyor belt. The propeller is pushing against the air not the ground. The conveyor belt hardly puts any backward force on the plane because the wheel bearings are almost frictionless, so they cancel out the backward movement of the belt no matter how fast the belt's moving. It's different for a car because it's moved by its wheels.
@Tw0DrinkMike A car has to spin its wheels up to the speed of the belt just in order to stay stationary. Once it exceeds the speed of the belt it will start moving forward. If you put 2 of the same car side by side, one on a belt and one on the ground, the one on the belt will accelerate much slower because the belt subtracts from its efforts.
@Tw0DrinkMike A plane will stay stationary on the belt even with its engine off (it will move slightly backwards because the wheel bearings aren't completely frictionless). But the point is, once the propeller is spun up, it will produce the same amount of thrust, no matter how fast the belt's moving. The belt doesn't affect the plane's thrust force, because the propeller is pushing on the air. The thrust will only be affected if the air is moving (wind), not the ground.
If the wheel bearings of the plane are pretty much frictionless, then the belt's motion will be canceled out by the spinning wheels, so the belt will exert essentially no backwards force on the plane. If it doesn't exert any backwards force, then what's going to stop the plane from moving forward and taking off? As soon as the propeller develops even a small amount of thrust, the plane will move forward as usual.
Guys, if you are confused about it, watch the whole episode, they explain the whole thing very clearly earlier. I initially thought it wouldn't take off too, but when they explained it by comparing it to the car, even I finally got it. xD
the plane was moving. but the myth was about if the plane held still could it take off which couldnt happen. the airplanes need runways to give them lift with the wings. this plane was moving so it was able to get lift but if it were holding still it wouldnt have worked.
@coyotedawg holding the plane stationary doesn't connect with the myth AT ALL!! of course the plane wont take off of the plane was held stationary (with a rope or something) . the myth is WILL the conveyor belt keep the plane stationary.
@coyotedawg No, Jesus Christ. The myth boils down to whether or not a conveyor belt would hold a plane stationary like it would a car. THE ANSWER IS NO. I cant believe how many people cant grasp this. The plane is pulled forward by the propeller, not driven by the wheels. The conveyor belt will have ZERO effect on the plane's forward acceleration, NO MATTER WHAT.
@philritter21 Yes, it will. The forward motion of the plane during the time it takes to reach the correct wind speed is dictated by the engines power transferred to the wheels. The fact the engine is pulling matter not, it's about LIFT and NO LIFT = NO FLIGHT.
If the plane was relying on traction from the wheels, it would not take flight. It would have stayed stationary. The thrust of the propellor drags it to speed.
Comments on any Mythbuster videos are all the same, FULL of people who think they know best. It seems the internet community jumped from being complete morons to complete geniuses, over night. Haha give me a break. None of you know shit, it's all opinion which you believe in.
@mitchio83 Ignorant much? I never said anything about physics. I just mean in general, regardless what the topic it maybe. You lot claim to know it all. Even the Mythbusters them selves seems to roll their eyes or sigh at the sound of "The fans said..."
@252Dazz252 If the argument was "what is 1+1?" and half the people were saying the answer is 2 and the other half say its 3, would you still say the answer is only a matter of opinion? The answer to this myth can be solved with math and physics. It is physically impossible for a airplane to be held stationary by a moving conveyor belt. This is why the answer is not a matter of opinion, do you get it now?
@mitchio83 I'm not even arguing this particular argument. I post a similar comments to my original on loads of Mythbuster videos because all i ever see is people claiming to know IT ALL. Do YOU get it now?
@252Dazz252 Ok well, when you say "None of you know shit, it's all opinion which you believe in." it sounds alittle dumb, because some things can be proven as facts, and some things are opinions, there is a difference.
The problem is that this is neither provable, nor disprovable with a scale, or full size demo, as there is no real useful relationship between the concept of a conveyor belt and that of an airplane.The test results are seen clearly, but the science behind the results are too subtle to understand unless the viewer has a strong grasp of the basic science of the physical world. This should never have been a Mythbusters episode, but rather, one of many lessons in a long study of physics.
@machturnip Well i think most people should be able to grasp 1 very straight forward concept of physics being taught to them. I don't understand when you say this its not provable, the fact that you say this makes me think you are not even sure what the lesson/point of the experiment was. You say "the science behind the results are too subtle to understand"...Really? Airplanes push off the air to move. Humans push off the ground to move, which ones movement would be negated by moving the ground?
@mitchio83 It is obvious that some people don't grasp the concept, or this debate wouldn't be going on. I didn't say that it wasn't provable by any method, just that the test, as they set it up with a conveyor belt and an airplane, didn't prove anything. I also didn't say that the science was too subtle to understand, period. I said "unless the viewer has a strong grasp of the basic science of the physical world." It is clear, some people don't have a grasp. Do you argue for the sake of arguing?
@machturnip I disagree, i think this concept is easily provable and easily explainable to somebody with no grasp of physics, Read the comments and you will see even alot of people in the comments are converted from thinking the plane would not fly, just from other youtubers explaining it to them in the comments. I think my example i gave of how easily the concept could be explained is very easy to understand for even the dumbest people.
@mitchio83 You aren't listening. Yes, the concept is easily provable, but the experiment that they set up does not prove it, it only outlines a flaw in the concept of the myth. It shows that there is no connection between the wheels and the propulsion of the plane, but only if you grasp the true concept behind the operation of the plane. Otherwise, it just looks as though the test was poorly done. There just needed to be more background science shown during the test to explain the results.
@machturnip The entire episode before the experiment was explaining why the plane would not be held still by the belt. How else would you prove that a plane can take off from a conveyor matching its speed, than to have a plane take off from a conveyor that is matching its speed. I think its alittle more satisfying than just showing a math equation and saying "busted". There is no better way to test this myth than what they did. They did exactly what the myth said.
@philritter21 I find it simple, maybe you find it simple, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people don't. Just look at the comments. Most people don't even fully understand what the experiment is about, let alone what the results mean.
The ones having a hard time with this believe plane should match the speed of the conveyor belt and thus have no forward motion. And yes, it would not take off in that case. However it is impossible for the plane to match the conveyor belt since its wheels spin freely. Throttling up the plane will always cause it to move forward. It CAN NOT match the belt's speed. Before the experiment I agreed with the pilot (who, like me, was mislead by the wording of the problem) but afterward it was clear.
@LinusManning actually it can. the wheels on the surface still create drag. if you started the conveyor with the engine off will it not roll backwards? it would take only a small amount of throttle (about 5% over idle speed) to match with the conveyor, only because of the drag of the wheels.
@AirForcedude5 Exactly. A person could probably hold the plane in place with the conveyor on. That's how little power it takes to overcome the conveyer.
@LinusManning exactly a car could match the speed and stay staionary since its working against the conveyor but since the plane uses the propeller to move forward it will always move forward when throttled the belt just makes the wheels spin faster
What is so confusing about this? Do people not understand that airplanes push against the air, not the ground, in order to move? f they pushed against the ground, then they wouldn't have any power once they left the ground. The wheels spin freely and no matter how fast or what direction they spin, it will not prevent the plane from taking off. Now if there was a very powerful tailwind, that could prevent the plane from taking off, which is why planes always fly into the wind.
I can't beleive the pilot actually thought the plane would remain stationary, where did he got his pilot license ?! An airplane fly's because the air pressure over the wing is lower than under the wing. How on earth can people think the wheels have any effect on that !!!
@yor1990 That's not how an aerofoil works. If it did, planes couldn't fly upside down, and you couldn't have aerofoils that are the same on the top and bottom (Which exist).
@XxKilleredxX I'm sorry but that is how it works. I'm not going to explain to you how the chord influences the lift and the characteristics of symetrical airfoils over the characteristics of an conventional airfloil.
I'm not here to critisize you. But the pilot, he is being a real dumb fuck.
@yor1990 My friend's are Aeronautical Engineering Majors (Well, 2 of them) and they have told me numerous times it works by pulling air up under the wings and giving it lift.
@XxKilleredxX The pressure is critical for wings. Why ? well when you have two half spheres and put them together and create a pure vacume inside it, you cannot sepperate them. In essense the lower the air pressure (think of the vacume) the more it pulls. The lower the pressure over the wing, the more it pulls the wing upwards.
If you still won't beleive me you should read some books ....
it's no surprise
considering airplanes don't have motors on the wheels, they depend solely on the thruster to move & brakes to turn.
PcRoX123hackedACC 22 hours ago
1:18 "even with the conveyor belt matching the plane's take-off speed". The plane was going faster than the conveyor belt. Either that or the wheels weren't touching the conveyor belt.
287adavis 23 hours ago
I NEED RESPONSE QUICK! Is airplane take off affected by ground friction?
ogiugi96 5 days ago
@ogiugi96 Of course it is. That is why airplanes have wheels and they don't just grind down the runway on there belly. The more friction, the more force that is needed to get to takeoff speed.
mitchio83 2 days ago
@mitchio83 Thanks bro, little to late, but thanks anyway !
ogiugi96 1 day ago
if there are people out there who believed that a plane could not take off on a conveyor belt, is a perfect & true example of low intelligence STUPID. ( and should have their face photos in the Wikipedia page for the term Stupid. ) even before Mythbusters PROVED it it dont take much brain power to understand basic physics of how an aircraft flies.
Topfueltrooper 1 week ago
@Topfueltrooper But apparently it takes too much to speak proper English.
kabukibear 3 days ago
HOW SURPRISING HOLY SHIT MY MIND IS BLOWN.
...
xamanto 1 week ago
I have lost all respect for mythbusters, not that I had much to begin with. Why bother doing sloppy experiments when you can just prove this stuff with good old fashion pencil and paper.
Stroggoni 1 week ago
@Stroggoni Ever heard of science experiments? Some times pencil and paper can be deceiving when dealing with real world variables, also, if people still don't believe an airplane can take off on a conveyor belt after seeing a video of it, you think they would believe it if they only saw it on paper?
mitchio83 2 days ago
It didnt even match the speed of the belt... obvs that it took off, the plane was going faster... they didnt even to it correct
OfficialBassLock 1 week ago
What's with all the ignorant comments? Did you guys not even watch the video? The propeller pushes against the air to propel the plane forward. The only purpose of the wheels is to support the plane. The movement of the conveyor has a negligible effect on the air speed at the level of the propeller.
Winstonsicle 1 month ago
Comment removed
kdy1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What are they going to do next? Stop a plane in mid-flight and see if it falls to the ground?
PorkyPiggles 1 month ago
it is fucking easy to understand: if the propeller is making the air move past the wings fast enough it will take off (lets put it this way: in a wind tunnel, with the flaps up it would take off)
its not its forward momentum which pulls it up, but the wind's speed, therefore a little plane with a powerful propeller will take off.
Belmott13 1 month ago
@Belmott13 That's not how it works. A plane needs airspeed to create lift across the wings. The propeller, no matter how big, will not provide lift across the wings.. Newtons 3rd Law. There is no opposing force because the force is attached to the plane. It's the same as standing on the deck of a yacht, holding a fan to blow wind into the sails.
As for the pilot in this video. If he doesn't understand the aerodynamics he shouldn't be flying.
PorkyPiggles 1 month ago
@PorkyPiggles I was wrong and did not consider newtons 3rd law... shit I should kill myself thank you for marking that out
Belmott13 1 month ago
I DONT WANT TO LIVE ON THIS EARTH ANYMORE.
jtfreed 1 month ago
well that was dumb the conveyer belt didnt even move it!
GunzofWar101 1 month ago
Mythbusters did not set this up properly.
cptsniper 1 month ago
Why is the pilot surprised? Didn't he cover principles of flight when he got his pilot's certificate?
K1W1fly 1 month ago
@K1W1fly
Pilot is suprised because he did the experiment wrong. He should have realized he was looking at his air indicator and not at the cones outside.
taledarkside 1 month ago
i herd the engines spool up
tylerboyd11 2 months ago
What kind of complete idiot would think that this would actually work?
tenou213 2 months ago
FAIL
RasputinReview 2 months ago
Shit fuck. now i have to forget about mythbusters they had a few interesting episodes though, but this is stupid
verbindingsfout 2 months ago
SO, DID THE PILOT GET FREE SEX?
MADEINMAIDEN 2 months ago
did they revisit this? they need to.
learwbc 2 months ago
Any airspeed over 25 mph over the wings will produce lift. The truck and conveyer belt is obviously moving at half the speed of the aircraft. What would have been much better is if the aircraft had been anchored to the ground and held stationary while the conveyer belt was pulled beneath it. It would have produced accurate results and the plane would not have taken off.
SuperAieee 3 months ago
@SuperAieee your an idiot and not getting the point. Nobody ever said the wings don't need air moving across them for flight. What people have a hard time understanding is that thrust does not act on the ground, it acts on the air. So it doesnt matter what the wheels are doing of how fast they are spinning, the propeller is pulling the plane forward. Once it starts moving forward you get lift. Your hung up on the ground, because your brain doesn't function like someone with common sense.
superskullmaster 2 months ago 3
@superskullmaster Actually, you just got trolled. Lets reread SuperAieee's post. "What would have been much better is if the aircraft had been anchored to the ground...and the plane would not have taken off." Pretty sure that is self-explanatory and true even without a conveyor. Trolololol.
ethurial 2 months ago
@superskullmaster *you're
dummybummyful 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuperAieee It's sort of a trick question because the real core question of it is: WILL THE PLANE MOVE FORWARD OR NOT? Most people intuition says NO because we are used to transportation like walking and cars which "push" from ground to move forward. But a plane WILL move forward because it "pulls" the AIR to move forward and the conveyer belt beneath it can move backwards as fast as it likes but it only makes the wheels spin faster and doesn't affect the forward movement of the plane.
onpahanvaan 2 months ago
That was poorly conducted.
TheEodtch 3 months ago
Holy fuck...This is just a horribly conducted experiment. The plane is clearly not stationary, it's moving forward, which means the speed of the plane is not the same as that of the conveyor belt.
If they'd done it correctly, the plane would not be moving forward and would NOT take off.
Mtc529 3 months ago
@Mtc529 YOUR WRONG!!! the airplane is using the prop to propel itself not the wheels. the wheels are merely a bearing to smooth the movement of the plane while its on the ground. That plane is an ultralight. You don't need anything but a drivers licence to fly one of those. Which means the pilot probably doesn't quite understand the physics of flight. He didn't have to pass any written test or ever solo or anything.
TheAviator55555 3 months ago
@Mtc529 the wheels are basically spinning freely it doesn't matter how fast the conveyor belt moves
busheyboydillful 3 months ago
l00000000l
piggynz 3 months ago
what a crappy experiment
cornelius600 3 months ago
why they dint put belts on aircraft carriers?
doel89 4 months ago
planes take off with airspeed not ground speed
MrRandomppl 4 months ago
the plane was still faster than car.
if it was the same same speed, the plane would be in the same place in space, and it wouldn't take off.
nge1301 4 months ago
@nge1301
I'm not so sure about that... the wheels of the plane would turn faster but the plane would still go foward...
At some point the wheels could break but I don't think the plane could ever stay in the same place in space...
krickrack 4 months ago
@nge1301 the planes power is in relation to the air around it and not the wheels on the ground. the fact that there was something being pulled from under it means nothing because all it did was make the wheels spin faster. if you pulled the air around the plane then it wouldnt move but pulling the ground from underneath it wont do anything
ibedubbin 3 months ago
look the myth is that you could get a plane to stay stationary on a treadmill...but this would in fact be impossble because the propellor will still pull it forward regardless of the speed of the treadmill...the plane will go just as fast as it did before on solid ground
kermit368 4 months ago
wtf this wasnt the myth the plane was moving forward enough to lift up it was suppose to stay in between like two cones for the myth and the tarp move under it
SeaMonkey12321 4 months ago
Oh, and it also proved that the plane still had plenty of friction with the ground, due to the fact that their conveyor belt is nothing more than some flimsy ribbon.
Tw0DrinkMike 4 months ago
Comment removed
krap101 5 months ago
This is a prime example of the fact that any average joe with the money can become a pilot, But understanding aerodynamics can make you a safer more proficient pilot.
Helicopterpilot16 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Its bullshit... If V of car (belt) = V of plane, plane would stay without moving relative to enviroment.... It means only wheels would be spinned, but plane would be without move, cause plane niid buoyancy to wings, not spinning wheels...
TheOkiGraphics 5 months ago
Comment removed
TheOkiGraphics 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WOW PEOPLE ARE FUCKING RETARDED
testify221 5 months ago
The plane moved forward tho?!?!? That's no myth, that's whats supposed to happen
bobcoolbobyeah 5 months ago
@bobcoolbobyeah the myth was that it would sit still.
mitchio83 5 months ago
Comment removed
maggiefox858 6 months ago
Comment removed
maggiefox858 6 months ago
i thought the coefficient of friction between the tarp and the runway would be way too great for the truck to be able to drag it
declareworr 6 months ago
Question: So if the "treadmill" was going twice as fast as the plane, or even 10x the speed of the plane, the plane would still move forward?
ghostofandy 7 months ago 11
@ghostofandy yes
daveygravey123456 6 months ago
@ghostofandy depending on how much the wheel's could handle, yes.
photomaster09 5 months ago
@ghostofandy yes, the wheels would spin faster but it gets its forward thrust from the propeller
kermit368 4 months ago
@ghostofandy yes, it would still move forward no matter how fast the belt is moving, because the conveyor produces no backwards force on the plane due to the wheels being able to spin freely and cancel out the belt's motion.
jetengine7 4 months ago
@ghostofandy yes, though if the conveyor got fast enough then i think the wheels wouldnt be able to turn fast enough and the plane might go backwards, but realistically the conveyer doesnt count for shit no matter how fast its going
xdoods 4 months ago
@ghostofandy Yes it would. It doesnt matter how fast the conveyorbelt is moving.
gullf1sk 3 months ago
@ghostofandy Yes. even if it was going1000000x faster it would take of just fine
TheAviator55555 3 months ago
@ghostofandy exactly
Hunikum2m 3 months ago
@ghostofandy yes. The propeller is what moves the plane forwards, so the wheels don't matter.
jozzaud 2 months ago
@jozzaud Yep! Only difference from a normal take-off is wheels spinning twice as fast as they would normally.
SilentShadowOfDeath 2 months ago 7
@ghostofandy The only problem would be the excess friction on the wheel axels due to the excess wheel speed cause by the treadmill.
HYPERZEPHARIAN 2 months ago
@HYPERZEPHARIAN And possible wind turbulence generated by the treadmill.
Stormwern 2 months ago
@ghostofandy
Stormwern 2 months ago
@ghostofandy yes, it's not like a car, which what moves it is the wheel, but the plane what moves it the propeller, if the propeller blows air from the front to the rear, it mooves forward ;]
srry for rock age-spelled english
Bolzan12 2 months ago
@ghostofandy The plane uses the air to move forward, *not* the ground. So the plane would still move forward even if the "treadmill" was going backwards at 10x the speed of the plane. The wheels would be rolling like crazy though (11x the speed of the plane).
paulotex19 1 month ago
wtf, who honestly believed this myth? they said it was controversial on their website. Do they not explain how planes work in America, pro tip, they need to be moving.
postmanpat261 7 months ago 13
@postmanpat261 "mythbusters did it, so it must be true"
dabajabaza111 1 month ago
@postmanpat261 It IS moving! the plane rushed past the traffic cones. It is moving relative to the air which is why it takes off. The propeller is pulling the plane through the air, which is what gives it it's speed. The wheels go faster because of the backwards moving ground but the propeller pulls it through the air.
AvidAstronomer 3 weeks ago
@AvidAstronomer That's what I said, how it was even a myth that it can take off by simply spinning the wheels is idiotic.
postmanpat261 3 weeks ago
this test and these arguments are a host of stupidity and ignorance. Pick up a book with lesson 1 in aerodynamics, read about the 4 forces; your answer is there
117zoomzoom 7 months ago
To dial back the anger a bit, and just try to help explain, picture the landspeeder from star wars driving over a conveyer belt. The belt would not change anything. Now replace the fantasy hover tech with some free spinning wheels that do basically the same thing- keep it off the ground and little else- and there you have it.
flourbiscuit76 7 months ago 2
Minetruly: you have exactly
My thoughts
8995Ryan 7 months ago
plane moves forward meanin obvisly the treadmill is moving too slowly
uk2008uk 7 months ago
i dont think the convayor belt was going as fast as the plane observe the plane and the cones the plane moving foward myth isnt busted yet.
lawereence 7 months ago
Well that was shit.
G777GUN 8 months ago
I think the point here is that it's not the wheels that are giving the plane its speed-- it's the propeller that's giving it its speed. Therefore, the conveyor belt doesn't drag the plane backwards or rob it of forward velocity-- the wheels just spin ineffectively while the propeller does all the pulling until the plane is going fast enough to gain lift.
If it were the wheels that "pushed" the plane, the result would have been different.
minetruly 8 months ago
@minetruly Thats te situation here, the plane DID go forward look the movie again. A plane can only fly when it has enough wind under the wings... and for that he needs forward motion.
xzaz2 6 months ago
Everybody who says everybody that says to take off you need to create pressure under the wing is an idiot is an idiot.
k1w1999 8 months ago
its not difficult people
nicwragg 8 months ago
everybody that says to take off you need to create pressure under the wing is an idiot.
constar001 8 months ago
You dont need to test this.. just think about it... the plane isnt like a car, it doesnt go forward from the wheels, a fan pushes it forward. no matter how fast the conveyor goes in the opposite direction, the fan pushes on the air. The only difference between a normal takeoff is that the wheels are moving faster to keep up with the speed of the fan AND the movement of the conveyor.
Kirch21x 8 months ago
matching the plane's takeoff speed? BULLSHIT!!
SuperShadow 8 months ago
@SuperShadow Really small planes like the one in the video take off at 40-60 mph. I don't know exactly what plane was being used, but the Cessna, a pretty small but still much larger plane than this one has a Vx speed of 60 mph. Meaning that not only will the plane easily takeoff, but it infact achieves the greatest ratio of altitude climb:distance.
TL;DR: You're a dumbass.
trucanadian 8 months ago
@trucanadian not moving relative to the air around it therefore no wind under the wing therefore no lift therefore NO FLIGHT!
SuperShadow 8 months ago
@SuperShadow What difference does it make how fast the belt's going? No matter how fast the belt's moving, the wheels will match that speed and just cancel out the movement of the belt.
jetengine7 4 months ago
@jetengine7 obviously the plane was moving FORWARD
SuperShadow 4 months ago
The only way the conveyor belt would effect the plane at all is if the conveyor belt was going in the same way as the plane aiding it's acceleration, and even then it wouldn't help by much.
drango 8 months ago
what the fuck? that myth wasnt if the plane was moving...
fuckshit485 8 months ago
As expected.
MrDarinWarren 9 months ago
What? He was expecting to just sit there knowing that the propeller provides the thrust not the wheels? The wheels are only for landing and take off, nothing more!
Now if you tried this with a car then it would most likely just sit there.
squidvis 9 months ago 2
It's like pulling the tablecloth from under the tableware... that and putting propellers on the tableware.
The wheels spin freely because and the plane will lift because the conveyer has minimal to no effect on the planes forward momentum, which is generated by the propeller, not the wheels, they spin freely, no gears, no brakes applied.
No power is generated trough the wheels. They are there to reduce the friction, thus the opposite going ground will just make the wheels spin faster.
wolfMetall 9 months ago
It will just make the tires spin 2 times as fast
liveitlong 9 months ago
These two dips will never recreate something exactly. This isn't a giant conveyor belt already moving, It's a tarp on the ground being pulled by a truck.
This isn't science, It's doing the first thing you think of.
Mmmathers4 9 months ago
The flaw is not in the experiment, but in the question being asked. People are curious as to whether a stationary plane can achieve enough lift to overcome gravity. This CANNOT BE ACHIEVED THROUGH A CONVEYOR BELT. One would need to construct some means of keeping the plane from moving laterally, but still able to retain it's ability to move vertically.
Xplayer007 10 months ago
OMG what was the point of that experiment, pure BS!
Proffezorn 10 months ago
@kayakincheese The only reason we can move through the air is because winds hardly ever get this high (65knts is fast for a natural wind). Even so, we feel the effects of the wind. Your ground speed slows in relation to any headwind component you experience. If you were to have a full value headwind that matched your airspeed, you'd be flying yet not moving in relation to the ground. It's pretty simple when you remember that flight has nothing to do with the ground or what it's doing.
stevenlong4289 10 months ago
@kayakincheese No, the engine's thrust is relative to the air as well, so if you faced the plane in a 65 knt headwind, you'd need the engine on and providing enough thrust to keep from being blown backwards. In these conditions, you could pull back on the yolk and you'd jump off the ground and would be flying (engine going and everything) with no relative motion to the ground.
stevenlong4289 10 months ago
what did they expect to happen. so the wheels turn twice as fast, the plane is still moving forward.
letmepointout 10 months ago
Comment removed
mdr279 10 months ago
The plane is moving relative to the ground though.
nrevelations777 10 months ago
@Th3Crash im not from europe bitch, im in germany!
chewbuggars 10 months ago
If the myth were "Confirmed" then the world could do without runways which what the real myth is about. What they have done is fly a plane off a giant conveyor belt (the Earth).
detectiveinspekta 10 months ago
@detectiveinspekta No, the conveyor belt did not help, nor hinder the performance of the plane, it had no effect. The myth is interesting because so many people thought the plane would be held still by the belt like a car or human would. Planes propel themselves differently than cars or humans, this is why they do not act the same on a conveyor belt.
mitchio83 10 months ago
This is my take on it. Not seen the whole vid but the myth is about if a plane will take off when the plane and convener belt speed is matched. In this case the plane is stationary relative to the outside ground. Therefore will not take off, no air movement. I don't really care on how the plane goes forward (propeller, jet engine, rockets), all that matters is that it maintains the same speed as the belt. But since everyone is saying the plane wheels spin faster then "Myth confused".
detectiveinspekta 10 months ago
@detectiveinspekta But, what if a conveyor belt can not hold an airplane stationary like it would a car or human, due to the different way they propel themselves? You made an assumption that the plane would be held stationary, that assumption was wrong.
mitchio83 10 months ago
k so the takeoff speed is nowhere close to the max speed. so if the pilot accelerated to takeoff speed "air speed" (thru the pitot) it will take off.
multisyncxp 11 months ago
depends whether the power is going to the wheels or the props, if it is applying the force through the air, the wheels don't matter, the plane will accelerate. if the force is applied on the tarp, it won't get any speed, therefore no air will pass the wings, and there will be no lift
Max0920793 11 months ago
@Max0920793 You are correct. Airplanes do not have powered wheels. They rely on there engines acting on the air to move.
mitchio83 10 months ago
Don't go onto treadmill with rollerskates if you believe this myth, you will inevitably crash into the wall behind you
war666head 11 months ago
Problem: was not a real conveyor belt. I think i will go ahead and make that web show "Busting the mythbusters"
DragonoftheEastblu 11 months ago
@DragonoftheEastblu What is a "real conveyor belt"? do they have to get an official one from Conveyor Belts Inc? A conveyor belt is a piece of moving ground. That was a real conveyor belt. You should think a bit harder on why an airplane CAN NEVER BE HELD STATIONARY ON A CONVEYOR BELT like a car or human would. Airplanes do not push off the ground to move like a human. Airplanes do not act the same way on a conveyor belt as a human.
mitchio83 11 months ago
@mitchio83 u do realize that u sound like a total fag right?. anyways conveyor belts are usually made of a strong fiber belt and wrapped around a tank track like system. perhaps you've seen one at ur local grocery store. this "conveyor belt" was nothing more than some tarp attached to a pick up. the tarp is causing too much traction to really match the speed. it should not make contact with the ground. plus this bush plane uses forward pull instead of rear thrust or the lift of a rotorcraft
DragonoftheEastblu 11 months ago
I can't believe an accredited pilot believed this ridiculous myth. So obvious with any basic knowledge of the physics involved.
Kojak7snap 11 months ago
LET ME DUMB IT DOWN FOR SOME OF YALL OUT THERE...if the plane is matching the speed of the conveyor belt and then begins to throttle it will move forward because it is NOT pushing off the ground for thrust...the wheels on the plane would be spinning faster than usual but what pulls the plane forward it the propeller
kermit368 11 months ago 36
@kermit368 but doesn't the myth state that the speed of the wheels and the speed of the belt have to match? This would obviously be difficult/impossible to achieve because you'd need a huge force on the belt to match the thrust of the plane, and both thrust and wheel/belt speed would probably go to infinity.
I recognise the thrust is against the air not the ground but can maybe countered by a force from the ground as long as there is some resistance in the wheel bearings or something?
mungojam 10 months ago
I love how pretentious some comments are despite the fact that some of you have no idea what you're talking about. The fact that the propeller is not connected to the wheels is completely irrelevant. Until that plane reaches takeoff speed and lifts off, the weight is supported by the landing gear. All this episode proved is that the engine was powerful enough to overcome the effect of the conveyor belt and move the plane forward. A car could do that too. Even Jamie stated this exp was BS.
Tw0DrinkMike 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike you dont seem to understand that it doesnt matter how much the plane weighs on the conveyor or how fast the treadmill is going...if the propeller spins the plane goes forward it doesnt have to overcome the conveyor
kermit368 4 months ago
@kermit368 I understand. The weight is supported by the landing gear. The landing gear is in contact with the conveyor. Until the plane becomes airborne, the wheels push off the ground beneath them. It does not matter what the source of thrust is. It does not matter whether the engine causes the wheels to rotate directly or indirectly. A propeller does not impart magical hovering abilities onto the aircraft. It is still sitting and has to overcome the effect of the ground beneath it.
Tw0DrinkMike 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike and i understand what your saying...but it does matter where the source of thrust is...the conveyor could be going a 100 mph...when that propellor comes on that plane moves forward...the speed does not effect its weight...and it doesnt have to overcome the force put on by the conveyor
kermit368 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike think of it this way, if you put a plane on a giant treadmill when it was off it would move back...but if you turned it on, some say it would stay in place but it would begin to move forward without a problem because it isnt having to fight against any greater force than it was so its thrust is not connected to the wheels and in fact is very relavent
kermit368 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike The conveyor belt does not affect the plane whatsoever because the wheels are free spinning. It would accelerate at the same rate with or without the conveyor belt. The propeller is pushing against the air not the ground. The conveyor belt hardly puts any backward force on the plane because the wheel bearings are almost frictionless, so they cancel out the backward movement of the belt no matter how fast the belt's moving. It's different for a car because it's moved by its wheels.
jetengine7 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike A car has to spin its wheels up to the speed of the belt just in order to stay stationary. Once it exceeds the speed of the belt it will start moving forward. If you put 2 of the same car side by side, one on a belt and one on the ground, the one on the belt will accelerate much slower because the belt subtracts from its efforts.
jetengine7 4 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike A plane will stay stationary on the belt even with its engine off (it will move slightly backwards because the wheel bearings aren't completely frictionless). But the point is, once the propeller is spun up, it will produce the same amount of thrust, no matter how fast the belt's moving. The belt doesn't affect the plane's thrust force, because the propeller is pushing on the air. The thrust will only be affected if the air is moving (wind), not the ground.
jetengine7 4 months ago
If the wheel bearings of the plane are pretty much frictionless, then the belt's motion will be canceled out by the spinning wheels, so the belt will exert essentially no backwards force on the plane. If it doesn't exert any backwards force, then what's going to stop the plane from moving forward and taking off? As soon as the propeller develops even a small amount of thrust, the plane will move forward as usual.
jetengine7 4 months ago
Guys, if you are confused about it, watch the whole episode, they explain the whole thing very clearly earlier. I initially thought it wouldn't take off too, but when they explained it by comparing it to the car, even I finally got it. xD
Tuuliska 11 months ago 2
@boelkstoffschlucker well then guess you shouldn't be a commercial pilot , cause you're a FUCKING idiot .
FunnyBus3rd 11 months ago
the plane was moving. but the myth was about if the plane held still could it take off which couldnt happen. the airplanes need runways to give them lift with the wings. this plane was moving so it was able to get lift but if it were holding still it wouldnt have worked.
coyotedawg 11 months ago
@coyotedawg holding the plane stationary doesn't connect with the myth AT ALL!! of course the plane wont take off of the plane was held stationary (with a rope or something) . the myth is WILL the conveyor belt keep the plane stationary.
FunnyBus3rd 11 months ago 2
@coyotedawg No, Jesus Christ. The myth boils down to whether or not a conveyor belt would hold a plane stationary like it would a car. THE ANSWER IS NO. I cant believe how many people cant grasp this. The plane is pulled forward by the propeller, not driven by the wheels. The conveyor belt will have ZERO effect on the plane's forward acceleration, NO MATTER WHAT.
philritter21 10 months ago
@philritter21
Alas, someone with a brain. I thank you.
Iridium725 10 months ago
@philritter21 Yes, it will. The forward motion of the plane during the time it takes to reach the correct wind speed is dictated by the engines power transferred to the wheels. The fact the engine is pulling matter not, it's about LIFT and NO LIFT = NO FLIGHT.
hypercatjohn 10 months ago
it flew beacuse the plane was moving
Kasejuhan 11 months ago
I'm an aerospace engineer and there is no reason this airplane shouldn't take off
thecrags 11 months ago
If the plane was relying on traction from the wheels, it would not take flight. It would have stayed stationary. The thrust of the propellor drags it to speed.
attovishnu 11 months ago
Comments on any Mythbuster videos are all the same, FULL of people who think they know best. It seems the internet community jumped from being complete morons to complete geniuses, over night. Haha give me a break. None of you know shit, it's all opinion which you believe in.
252Dazz252 1 year ago
@252Dazz252 Opinion? The laws of physics are accepted as facts, not opinions.
mitchio83 11 months ago
@mitchio83 Ignorant much? I never said anything about physics. I just mean in general, regardless what the topic it maybe. You lot claim to know it all. Even the Mythbusters them selves seems to roll their eyes or sigh at the sound of "The fans said..."
252Dazz252 11 months ago
@252Dazz252 If the argument was "what is 1+1?" and half the people were saying the answer is 2 and the other half say its 3, would you still say the answer is only a matter of opinion? The answer to this myth can be solved with math and physics. It is physically impossible for a airplane to be held stationary by a moving conveyor belt. This is why the answer is not a matter of opinion, do you get it now?
mitchio83 11 months ago
@mitchio83 I'm not even arguing this particular argument. I post a similar comments to my original on loads of Mythbuster videos because all i ever see is people claiming to know IT ALL. Do YOU get it now?
252Dazz252 11 months ago
@252Dazz252 Ok well, when you say "None of you know shit, it's all opinion which you believe in." it sounds alittle dumb, because some things can be proven as facts, and some things are opinions, there is a difference.
mitchio83 11 months ago
The problem is that this is neither provable, nor disprovable with a scale, or full size demo, as there is no real useful relationship between the concept of a conveyor belt and that of an airplane.The test results are seen clearly, but the science behind the results are too subtle to understand unless the viewer has a strong grasp of the basic science of the physical world. This should never have been a Mythbusters episode, but rather, one of many lessons in a long study of physics.
machturnip 1 year ago
@machturnip Well i think most people should be able to grasp 1 very straight forward concept of physics being taught to them. I don't understand when you say this its not provable, the fact that you say this makes me think you are not even sure what the lesson/point of the experiment was. You say "the science behind the results are too subtle to understand"...Really? Airplanes push off the air to move. Humans push off the ground to move, which ones movement would be negated by moving the ground?
mitchio83 11 months ago
@mitchio83 It is obvious that some people don't grasp the concept, or this debate wouldn't be going on. I didn't say that it wasn't provable by any method, just that the test, as they set it up with a conveyor belt and an airplane, didn't prove anything. I also didn't say that the science was too subtle to understand, period. I said "unless the viewer has a strong grasp of the basic science of the physical world." It is clear, some people don't have a grasp. Do you argue for the sake of arguing?
machturnip 11 months ago
@machturnip I disagree, i think this concept is easily provable and easily explainable to somebody with no grasp of physics, Read the comments and you will see even alot of people in the comments are converted from thinking the plane would not fly, just from other youtubers explaining it to them in the comments. I think my example i gave of how easily the concept could be explained is very easy to understand for even the dumbest people.
mitchio83 11 months ago
@mitchio83 You aren't listening. Yes, the concept is easily provable, but the experiment that they set up does not prove it, it only outlines a flaw in the concept of the myth. It shows that there is no connection between the wheels and the propulsion of the plane, but only if you grasp the true concept behind the operation of the plane. Otherwise, it just looks as though the test was poorly done. There just needed to be more background science shown during the test to explain the results.
machturnip 11 months ago
@machturnip The entire episode before the experiment was explaining why the plane would not be held still by the belt. How else would you prove that a plane can take off from a conveyor matching its speed, than to have a plane take off from a conveyor that is matching its speed. I think its alittle more satisfying than just showing a math equation and saying "busted". There is no better way to test this myth than what they did. They did exactly what the myth said.
mitchio83 11 months ago
@machturnip ?? What the heck are you going on about? This is a very simple concept. Its not complicated at all.
philritter21 10 months ago
@philritter21 I find it simple, maybe you find it simple, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people don't. Just look at the comments. Most people don't even fully understand what the experiment is about, let alone what the results mean.
machturnip 10 months ago
The ones having a hard time with this believe plane should match the speed of the conveyor belt and thus have no forward motion. And yes, it would not take off in that case. However it is impossible for the plane to match the conveyor belt since its wheels spin freely. Throttling up the plane will always cause it to move forward. It CAN NOT match the belt's speed. Before the experiment I agreed with the pilot (who, like me, was mislead by the wording of the problem) but afterward it was clear.
LinusManning 1 year ago 2
@LinusManning actually it can. the wheels on the surface still create drag. if you started the conveyor with the engine off will it not roll backwards? it would take only a small amount of throttle (about 5% over idle speed) to match with the conveyor, only because of the drag of the wheels.
AirForcedude5 1 year ago
@AirForcedude5 Exactly. A person could probably hold the plane in place with the conveyor on. That's how little power it takes to overcome the conveyer.
lockdownrocks 1 year ago
Comment removed
kermit368 11 months ago
@LinusManning exactly a car could match the speed and stay staionary since its working against the conveyor but since the plane uses the propeller to move forward it will always move forward when throttled the belt just makes the wheels spin faster
kermit368 11 months ago
What is so confusing about this? Do people not understand that airplanes push against the air, not the ground, in order to move? f they pushed against the ground, then they wouldn't have any power once they left the ground. The wheels spin freely and no matter how fast or what direction they spin, it will not prevent the plane from taking off. Now if there was a very powerful tailwind, that could prevent the plane from taking off, which is why planes always fly into the wind.
jetengine7 1 year ago
I can't beleive the pilot actually thought the plane would remain stationary, where did he got his pilot license ?! An airplane fly's because the air pressure over the wing is lower than under the wing. How on earth can people think the wheels have any effect on that !!!
yor1990 1 year ago
@yor1990 That's not how an aerofoil works. If it did, planes couldn't fly upside down, and you couldn't have aerofoils that are the same on the top and bottom (Which exist).
XxKilleredxX 1 year ago
@XxKilleredxX I'm sorry but that is how it works. I'm not going to explain to you how the chord influences the lift and the characteristics of symetrical airfoils over the characteristics of an conventional airfloil.
I'm not here to critisize you. But the pilot, he is being a real dumb fuck.
yor1990 1 year ago
@yor1990 My friend's are Aeronautical Engineering Majors (Well, 2 of them) and they have told me numerous times it works by pulling air up under the wings and giving it lift.
XxKilleredxX 1 year ago
@XxKilleredxX The pressure is critical for wings. Why ? well when you have two half spheres and put them together and create a pure vacume inside it, you cannot sepperate them. In essense the lower the air pressure (think of the vacume) the more it pulls. The lower the pressure over the wing, the more it pulls the wing upwards.
If you still won't beleive me you should read some books ....
yor1990 1 year ago